User talk:AnEditorNameA

January 2017

Hello AnEditorNameA, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Design Within Reach have been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Meters (talk) 20:28, 26 January 2017 (UTC) disruptive template accidentally used replaced with correct soft copyvio by Meters (talk) 03:26, 27 January 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Design Within Reach. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. I removed a section that was completely unsourced and was unacceptably promotional. And I see that User:Atlantic306 had to remove the same copyright violations from this article that I had already removed once. Do not restore this again. Meters (talk) 03:45, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AnEditorNameA, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi AnEditorNameA! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Soni (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, AnEditorNameA. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Exemplo347 (talk) 22:22, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of John McPhee (entrepreneur)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on John McPhee (entrepreneur), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Exemplo347 (talk) 22:23, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John McPhee (entrepreneur) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John McPhee (entrepreneur) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John McPhee (entrepreneur) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Exemplo347 (talk) 08:53, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible COI

You have already been pointed to WP:COI. Do you have a conflict of interest wrt Design Within Reach or its employees? You are required to disclose such a COI if you work for the company or are making these edits as part of paid work for any other company. Meters (talk) 21:40, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About John Edelman (Baseball)

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give John Edelman (Baseball) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. GabetheEditor (talk) 19:12, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't move John Edelman to John Edelman (Baseball) even once the copy and paste version has been deleted. There are no other articles about any John Edelmans so there is no need to disambiguate the title. Please read WP:TITLE and WP:DISAMBIG. If you were thinking of creating a new article about a John Edelman, why do you thing that your new article should be the primary topic? It's not a good idea for a new editor to jump in and start making these types of decisions with no input from other editors. I suggest that you stop. For that matter, you proposed title was incorrect. If it were to be move, the correct title would have been John Edelman (baseball).

You also have not yet answered the question of your potential conflict of interest or paid editing. If you don't satisfactorily address this the topic can be raised at WP:COIN. Meters (talk) 22:00, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at John Edelman, you may be blocked from editing. Do not hijack an existing article. Meters (talk) 03:22, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to John McPhee (entrepreneur). —Non-Dropframe _talk 05:02, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John G. Edelman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John G. Edelman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John G. Edelman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. CatcherStorm ^talk 17:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of John Edelman (disambiguation)

John Edelman (disambiguation), a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/John Edelman (disambiguation) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of John Edelman (disambiguation) during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Exemplo347 (talk) 20:27, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John Edelman (disambiguation) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Edelman (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Edelman (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 22:20, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. I'm User: GabetheEditor! Talk to me here. 22:21, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Your addition to Design Within Reach has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:10, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. PhilKnight (talk) 01:59, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]